IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [trill] Shepherd write-up for draft-ietf-trill-channel-tunnel-06.txt

Donald Eastlake <d3e3e3@gmail.com> Thu, 13 August 2015 22:04 UTC

Return-Path: <d3e3e3@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: trill@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: trill@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87BE61ACE0D; Thu, 13 Aug 2015 15:04:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.749
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.749 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id s6ByUPLH7HRo; Thu, 13 Aug 2015 15:04:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ob0-x22c.google.com (mail-ob0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c01::22c]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D8B511ACE0A; Thu, 13 Aug 2015 15:04:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by obbhe7 with SMTP id he7so48163347obb.0; Thu, 13 Aug 2015 15:04:17 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=0Pz0zj88L7IoLSSx1S43X1jRZdt3KD0dZPUjfoGq6zY=; b=QiCMLxrhSW7tHuZJqSQk0kR8zGuU1Dhoe1jFjNsljEnNjy53UpMr9sNpa69UguhhB9 9uWDUkTkM1LyFxJ/D+s7H09g40ClZsp1Sqd1kzB5SCeaCq8H33jFbJJ4os8PLr+WuRvL WQyT6jiSteVWy91q6QbGsKD3boE5riypND6sj0vOV2NnA5L6vfGRj9zaKeX0S+xoKj0q g1YiDHuN4D12BKWywqEsIF5SXLZqL9DodHjg06i6lRt7d3DhcwnkouObk1L+wVZogrID O3omjVFIhwxph53rILEKX9blCxBycR/Pe86BjFGID7UNQ73ToUlejj3DRLRNUMij61nr 2z+w==
X-Received: by 10.60.74.2 with SMTP id p2mr36274832oev.57.1439503457265; Thu, 13 Aug 2015 15:04:17 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.76.173.3 with HTTP; Thu, 13 Aug 2015 15:04:02 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <00cf01d0d608$3bdfa7a0$b39ef6e0$@ndzh.com>
References: <005f01d0d5ca$9018f850$b04ae8f0$@ndzh.com> <CAF4+nEHMOOtLj3WgEwicr-cJtu02jfWKTQdy3R-C6LRg8Yyj3g@mail.gmail.com> <00cf01d0d608$3bdfa7a0$b39ef6e0$@ndzh.com>
From: Donald Eastlake <d3e3e3@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2015 18:04:02 -0400
Message-ID: <CAF4+nEFfB3E7VYh=XB7aTy4eG3JftVFjw1pLsDEia20zOjGV_Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Susan Hares <shares@ndzh.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a11360288392f1c051d388400"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/trill/Hg7_ceNb-UzzXe24UFUBIJ37Ylw>
Cc: draft-ietf-trill-channel-tunnel@ietf.org, "trill@ietf.org" <trill@ietf.org>, Jon Hudson <jon.hudson@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [trill] Shepherd write-up for draft-ietf-trill-channel-tunnel-06.txt
X-BeenThere: trill@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Developing a hybrid router/bridge." <trill.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/trill>, <mailto:trill-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/trill/>
List-Post: <mailto:trill@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:trill-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/trill>, <mailto:trill-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2015 22:04:19 -0000

Hi Sue,

Actually I take back one thing I said earlier. See below at <dee3>.

Thanks,
Donald
=============================
 Donald E. Eastlake 3rd   +1-508-333-2270 (cell)
 155 Beaver Street, Milford, MA 01757 USA
 d3e3e3@gmail.com

On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 4:40 PM, Susan Hares <shares@ndzh.com> wrote:

> ...
>
>
>
> p. 9 figure 3.1 – Do you want the text in the possible security
> information to be changed from:
>
>
>
> from:
>
>
>
> RBridge-channel (0x8946) | CHV=0 | channel Protocol
>
>
>
> to:
>
>
>
> RBridge-channel (0x8946) | CHV=0 | Tunnel Protocol = TBD
>
>
>
> Yup, good catch.
>

<dee3> Not really. At first glance, you seemed to be correct and I thought
so but looking at this more closely, what is going on is that you have an
RBridge Channel protocol message nested inside an RBridge Channel Tunnel
message. So looking at figure 3.1, in the first line we have the TBD
RBridge Channel Tunnel protocol number. This is followed by the rest of
that RBridge Channel message header. Then, the nested RBridge Channel
protocol message starts with a 2nd instance of the RBridge Channel
Ethertype. The protocol number for this nested RBridge Channel message
could be any valid RBridge Channel protocol number. I've changed the figure
to look like the following so where it used to say "channel Protocol" it
now says "Nested Channel Protocol" and where it said "Channel Protocol
Specific Data ..." it now says "Nested Channel Protocol Specific Data ...".
Also, this isn't actually data inside the Possible Security Information.
The Possible Security Information is variable length material that is only
present if the SType (Security Type) field is non-zero.

                     1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3
 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|    RBridge-Channel (0x8946)   | CHV=0 | Tunnel Protocol = TBD |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|          Flags        |  ERR  | SubERR| RESV4 | SType |  0x2  |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|  Possible Security Information
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|    RBridge-Channel (0x8946)   | CHV=0 |Nested Channel Protocol|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|          Flags        |  ERR  |                               |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+                               |
|         Nested Channel Protocol Specific Data ...             /
/                                                               /

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email